STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

BIHAR, PATNA

(Appeal No. 450 of 2011)

Bishnudeo sharma, S/o- Late Hari Ram Kripallu Sharma, R/o- Mohalla-Head Manpur, P.O- Buniyadganj, District- Gaya.

                                                                                                                                                             …..         Appellant

VERSUS

The Manager, Rambagh Cold Storatge Pvt. Ltd., Gaya Nawada Road Manpur  P.S.- Mofassail, District- Gaya.                                                                                                                                                             …..                                          Respondent

BEFORE:

Mr. Raj Kumar Pandey, Member

Md. Shamim Akhttar, Member

ORDER

Date: 13.06.2023

Per: Md. Shamim Akhttar, Member

This appeal has been filed against the order dated 14.07.2011 passed by the learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum/Commission, Gaya in Consumer Complaint Case No. 17 of 2010 whereby and whereunder the complaint filed by the appellant/complainant was dismissed. 

Case of the complainant in brief is that the complainant kept forty three bags of potato each containing 50 kg in the Cold Storage of the opposite party/respondent and due to the negligence and carelessness of the staff of the cold storage the entire bags were damaged and was not delivered to the complainant and the complainant filed the complainant claiming Rs. 15,0000/- as compensation which includes cost of potato Rs. 50,000/- and mesne profit of Rs. 50,000/- and Rs. 50,000/- as mental agony harassment etc.

Being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the order dated 14.07.2011 passed by the learned District Forum, Gaya the present appeal has been preferred mainly on the grounds that the order passed the learned Forum is flimsy and erroneous and fit to be set aside and the complainant also send legal notice, inspite of that the potatoes were not delivered to him and the learned forum did not considered the loss suffered by the complainant and the impugned order is against the principles of natural justice and is fit to be set aside.

Learned lawyer for the appellant appeared but submitted that he has no instructions from his client and also made the endorsement to this effect in the margin the order sheet.

The respondent/opposite party has not appeared in spite of registered notice issued to him.

We have gone through the record including the order impugned . The impugned order is well discussed and does not require and interference by this commission. In the result, appeal is dismissed. There is no order as to costs.

A copy of this order be supplied to both the parties free of cost as mandated by the Consumer Protection Act. The order be uploaded forth with on the website of the Commission.

Let the file be consigned in the record room along with copy of this order.    

(Md. Shamim Akhtar)                                                                                                                 (Raj Kumar Pandey)                   

        Member                                                                                                                                          Member                                                     

Agam